Federal lawmakers are debating whether or not the U.S. should take military action in Syria after evidence has emerged that the Assad regime has used sarin gas on citizens. Despite believing chemical weapons have been used, Congressman Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-11) told NJ Today Managing Editor Mike Schneider that if a vote were held today, he would oppose authorizing President Barack Obama to use military force.
Frelinghuysen said he believes Obama should have acted a year and a half ago and that he’s not convinced the president’s plan will even have the intended effect. “We have a horrible tragedy — the use of sarin gas. Over 100,000 people have been killed in Syria on both sides. You got millions of people that are now refugees in neighboring countries and you’ve got about 7 million Syrians in turmoil within Syria itself and now the president is finally acting. And quite honestly unless you put boots on the ground, missiles are not gonna do whatever the president suggests they’re going to do to make the situation any better,” he said.
If Obama had gotten an international consensus from the United Nations, Frelinghuysen said he would feel better about the resolution. “I’d feel even better if the president would tell us that he’s actually going to explain the rationale for his potential upcoming decision,” he said.
Frelinghuysen said the evidence is “pretty clear” that the Assad regime used sarin gas. He also said there were likely earlier instances of chemical weapons use.
Some have said if the U.S. chooses to do nothing, it will send a signal to countries like Iran and North Korea that the nation is weak. Frelinghuysen said it’s too late for that. “I think the signal has already been sent that we’re weak. There were incidents of use of chemical weapons months ago and 100,000 people have been killed,” he said. “And millions of refugees have flooded into Jordan and Turkey and other parts of the Middle East. I think the president had an opportunity over a year and a half ago to really follow Sen. McCain’s suggestion.”
The situation wouldn’t be resolved by taking action now, Frelinghuysen said. “Quite honestly I’m not sure it’ll change the dynamic on the ground because if we destroy air bases, if we destroy some tanks, the people on the ground who are not particularly reliable, many of the rebels themselves are allied with Al-Qaeda or Al-Nusra Front. They may take advantage of what we do from air strikes because we don’t have any presence — military presence — on the ground,” he said. “So the president has put himself in a box and put his credibility on the line. And now to some extent is shifting the blame potentially on the House of Representatives, which I think is pretty inexcusable.”